Army. Is this usual?

I'll ask the guy myself sometime, but without going into details (because it's a secret mission for my eyes only, OK?), I have been reading a missive this morning, or perhaps more properly, a "despatch", from the NZ Defense Force.

And what I find really interesting, is that the document does not refer to "the Army" throughout, it refers to "Army". Like it's a single entity. Or something. Like this:

"The first requirement for Army, therefore..."

"Again, it is fair to say that Army does not..." and

"This short document proposes that Army develop..."

At least one person with military experience comes here - is this the norm? Are Navy & Airforce referred to the same way?

Well, Airforce probably IS a single entity these days...